The general's comments on gays

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by tradermaji, Mar 13, 2007.

  1. Entitled to his opinion?

    Sure, as a citizen.

    But entitled as a representative of the U.S. government and military to say it?

    Say he was a Buddhist and he said Christianity was immoral.

    No, for the same reason we can't yell fire in a crowded theater, these public figures that are working for the tax payer have to keep their mouths shut on topics of "morality."
  2. Does that go for professors at taxpayer funded universities as well?
  3. I agree with you... he is entitled to his personal opinion, but not express it in a way that is sounds as if it is a policy of the US Govt.
  4. No, it does not. That is why there is the tenure system even in state funded universities.

  5. there's a professor going about saying in his seminars that he wants to see population reduction by 80-90% and that the ebola virus would be the perfect medium to accomplish it. hes got quite a following i may add...
  6. So only certain public servants who are paid by our tax dollars should be censored?
  7. I'm sure this professor feels he is one of the ones who should go on.
  8. That's not a very good analogy. It's not the policy of the military that Christianity is immoral. It is the policy that homosexual activity is immoral. Why ban it otherwise?

    They also ban adultery, a point he made and basically lumped them together. Was it also outrageous for him to be "judgmental" about adultery.
  9. Remember, tenure does not protect him/her from illegal activities. If his speeches are deemed illegal by a court of law, he/she can go to jail and lose his/her job.
    #10     Mar 13, 2007